Federal Jobs Plan Draws Fire

Newsday.com ^ | November 16, 2002 | ASSOCIATED PRESS

[listenhillary]

Washington - A Bush administration plan to let private companies compete for nearly half the nation's federal civilian jobs drew charges of union-busting and political favoritism from Democrats and labor officials.

Administration officials defended the proposal, issued Thursday, as necessary to improve service and cut costs. But critics said the plan was just another example of the administration's anti-labor policies.

"The Bush administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees," said Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "They are systematically conspiring to bust their unions, gut their civil service protections and hand over their jobs to politically well-connected contractors."

[listenhillary]

So why did we Federalize the Airport screeners again?

Demo's are going to squeal like a stuck pig!

The General Accounting Office has determined that public-private competition could save taxpayers 30 percent on each contract.

[listenhillary]

"Now we see the real White House agenda - it's not homeland security, it's union busting," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Were you sober a day to figure this out?

[arielb]

well the airport screeners are going to be part of Homeland Security Dept which gives Bush flexibility on hiring/firing workers. Dems hoping that airport screeners will strengthen unions are really going nuts now!

[borisbob69]

No Ted...if it was union busting he would have decided to make 100% of the federal jobs a competitive bid process instead of just 50%.

Here's hoping he is able to institute this process and make up for the price increases of everything associated with union thugs/hacks/goons and their ridiculous demands. I have never worked with a less motivated bunch of entitlement minded, do as little as I can get away with, don't do more than the next person people in my entire 40 year work history...than the whiny lib union types I have worked with in the past 15 years!

[randita]

"The Bush administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees," said Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees.

There might be a handful of reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees out there, but I've yet to run across many. They certainly aren't in large supply at the motor vehicle agencies, the IRS or the SS Admin.

[SLB]

I have been a federal employee of some sort for the past 33 years. The last 17 as a civil servant for the Army. I am NOT a union member, nor am I even eligible for union membership or representation.

I have seen a huge movement to privatize the federal work force and have seen that same movement fall flat on its face. The reason - management, or rather the lack of good management practices. We send the military members, colonels and above, out to negotiate the contracts and they get taken to the cleaners each and every time. That is why the system will never work. Not only are there problems with the government unions, but with all unions. They are there for one reason, to take the employer to the cleaners in any way they can. They no longer serve the worker as they were designed to do, they are now a self sustaining entity that feeds on the American worker.

The example that is most lasting on me is at Ft Knox. The base support activities were contracted out last year. In the first year the contract had a cost over run of $10,000,000.00. The contract was won by General Dynamics, and then sub cotracted out to smaller companies. The federal workers had bid on the contract and were under bid by GD for about $3,000,000.00. It doesn't take a real mental giant to realize the work is costing the taxpayer $7,000,000.00 more. To top it off, the quality of work is no where near what was there before the private corporations got involved.

[cynicom]

No money will be saved by hiring contractors. Nothing the government ever does lessens expenditures. If Bush is really serious, sell USPS for a lot of dough and then prune the government top layers by ten per cent per year for three years.. They are non-union and they are the gross fat. Mandate that each agency must eliminate 30 per cent of all supervisory personell within three years. Then watch them run for cover.

Out sourcing the "workers" does nothing, the cost most likely will be higher.

[yoe]

What would anyone expect Mr. Harnage to say, he works for the Unions. However the government is weighted down with thousands of union protected unqualified employees. This Bureaucracy is so huge it almost outstrips the civilian population at this point with millions and millions tied to the Federal and States tit. The Trojan Horse, Mr. Harnage claims the Bush Administration is going to use as a Union buster, is actually a more equitable and fair way to run the government. The supposed Trojan Horse belongs to Mr. Harnage and his post as the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees.

Angela Styles is most correct when she says ”... public-private competition should be the norm. That readers is what we have lost with this behemoth we call the Federal Government, that animal is in competition with the people rather than the other way round which is what the Founding Fathers were so concerned about. Mr.Harnage is fighting for his life and his lively hood...the taxpayer’s dollar he so dearly needs. The “civilians” are not protected; we must compete with his unions for lesser dollars and pay their salaries at the same time with our taxes. Fair? I don’t think so. Unions need to learn how to live as lean as the rest of us. Senator Kennedy can go kite flying with Mr. Harnage.